Re: tab complete for COPY populated materialized view TO
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: tab complete for COPY populated materialized view TO |
Дата | |
Msg-id | a2b8cead-f02c-4a43-9934-7f6b724349e4@oss.nttdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: tab complete for COPY populated materialized view TO (Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: tab complete for COPY populated materialized view TO
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2025/04/09 19:24, Kirill Reshke wrote: > On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 at 14:45, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2025/04/09 18:25, Kirill Reshke wrote: >>> On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 at 13:23, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> hi. >>>> >>>> we allow the "COPY table TO" command to copy rows from materialized >>>> views in [1]. >>>> The attached patch is to add a tab complete for it. >>>> >>>> [1] https://git.postgresql.org/cgit/postgresql.git/commit/?id=534874fac0b34535c9a5ab9257d6574f78423578 >>> >>> Hi! >>> Patch works good for me, but I noticed that psql COPY <tab> suggests >>> partitioned relation both with and without this patch. Maybe that's >>> not a big problem, if [0] will be pushed. >> >> Is the partitioned table currently tab-completed for the COPY FROM case? > > If I'm not mistaken, yes. I double checked. > >> INSTEAD OF INSERT triggers - though maybe that's overkill? > > That's wild to me, psql tab completions feature designed to support > postgresql not fully, but in frequent cases. So maybe we should keep > it stupud. I agree that it's reasonable to exclude such rarely used objects from tab-completion. How about including just tables, partitioned tables, foreign tables, and materialized views? I've attached a patch for that. Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: